Heineken Asia Pacific Wins Legal Battle Against Copyright Infringement, Secures Order to Expunge Imitative Logo from Register
In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court has ruled in favor of Heineken Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd., directing the removal of a deceptively similar "TIGER" logo from the Register of Copyrights. The court found that the impugned logo registered by Mr. Vijay Keshav Wagh closely resembled Heineken's internationally recognized "TIGER" logo, thus infringing on its copyright.
The case, presided over by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, centered on Heineken's claim that the respondent's logo, which incorporated a tiger graphic, was nearly identical to their own logo, despite minor additions such as the letter 'V' and textual elements. The petitioner argued that such modifications did not detract from the essential similarity of the artistic work, which they had registered and used globally.
Heineken's counsel, Ms. Priya Adlakha, highlighted procedural lapses by the Trade Marks Registry, which failed to cite Heineken's prior registered "TIGER" logo in the respondent's application process. This oversight deprived the Registrar of Copyrights of the opportunity to conduct a thorough inquiry into the originality of the respondent's artistic work.
The court also took note of the respondent's false declaration in the copyright application, claiming the work was "Unpublished" despite evidence of prior use claims in trademark applications. This, the court observed, indicated malafide intentions, further justifying the rectification of the copyright register.
Justice Gedela concluded that the respondent's registration could not continue, directing the Registrar of Copyrights to expunge the impugned logo within four weeks. The decision underscores the importance of diligent adherence to copyright and trademark laws, emphasizing the need for registries to ensure thorough examination processes to prevent similar disputes.
Bottom Line:
Copyright infringement - Rectification of entry in the Register of Copyrights due to deceptive similarity and absence of bonafide intent in the application for copyright registration.
Statutory provision(s):
Copyright Act, 1957, Section 50; Copyright Rules, 2013, Rule 70; Trade Marks Act, 1999, Sections 13, 17, 45(1).
Heineken Asia Pacific Pte. Ltd. v. Mr. Vijay Keshav Wagh, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2864268
